arXiv preprint ·
Benchmarking Forecasting Agents on Yesterday's Tomorrows
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Digital agents can now gather and organize information, reason over it, and use tools to complete complex tasks. Forecasting puts all of these abilities to the test: it requires integrating incomplete evidence, inferring causal drivers, and committing to calibrated probabilistic judgments. Existing benchmarks are poorly suited to measuring and improving this ability. Live benchmarks provide feedback only after events resolve, so every evaluation cycle waits on the calendar; fixed-corpus evaluations return results immediately but confine research to pre-collected documents. We introduce FABench, a scalable backtesting environment for Forecasting Agents. An automated pipeline discovers events, generates questions, and resolves outcomes for any past forecast date, so the benchmark can be renewed to stay ahead of model training cutoffs; its first release poses 287 questions across nine domains. Agents research each question freely in an archive environment that combines an offline archive with live web search screened to prevent temporal leakage. Evaluating agents built on eight recent models, we find that retrieval improves the Brier score of all eight in every retrieval setting and lifts the leading agents to the market consensus on the 54 questions linked to Polymarket, with the best three scoring slightly above it. Research traces reveal recurring failures in how agents weigh and apply evidence, leaving ample room for improvement. We release our code, data, and archive environment as a foundation for community research on forecasting agents.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
When the Same Prompt Gives Different Answers (and the Same Answer Isn't Always Right): A Taxonomy of Failure Mechanisms, Testing, and Mitigation Strategies for LLM-Assisted Evidence Synthesis Read-and-Evaluate Tasks
CIRCE Divines LLM Task Complexity from Constraint Structure
Certified Access: Test-Time Compute on Conservative Physics-Structured AI Memory
Verifying Text-to-SQL Queries under Changing Business Semantics
HERA: Assessing an Autonomous Agent for Quantum Device Measurement
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.